Green potatoes

Page 4 of 7  
Todd wrote:

At last some engagement!
Those other crops (which other crops are they?) cannot produce anything like the calories per unit area that grains do. It's all about the efficiency to harvest sunshine. We are running out of arable land and losing much constantly while every day there are a few million more mouths to feed. Aside from the obvious that we cannot keep reproducing ourselves to extinction this implies the need for more food per acre of land not less.
Have you read about the green revolution? Start with Wikipedia. For the current situation go to the FAO they have been grappling with this for decades. Those are the kinds of figures that make your scheme impossible to apply generally. As Fran said, what you suggest is only possible in rich societies.

Assuming that what you say about yield and cost are true about California wine you cannot extrapolate this to your scheme to do away with carbohydrates as a major component of the world's diet. For a start their measure of success is to produce quality wine not feed the maximum people per acre.

No it isn't. You merely assert your case but I need you to produce some evidence.

I am mainly organic but I would describe my approach as eclectic with a bias towards recylcling and away from introduced inputs. I have no need of ammonium nitrate as I can get N from manures. But I will use Potassium sulphate as there is no other practical way to get K into my soil.
This is not relevant as I am not trying to feed a family on my vege plot.
Let us not get too distracted by the specifics of my garden, you need to show how the world can still eat by doing away with 2/3 of its calories that come from carbohydrates. And show the FAO how to find a way to feed those millions of poor buggers who already don't get three squares most days. And the millions extra that will be born daily until we get means of population control other than starvation and war.
David
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 06/11/2014 04:21 PM, David Hare-Scott wrote:

Hi David,
Replace those calories with fat. It is the idea fuel for humans. And more calories per weight than carbs. Plus, no Diabetes. Hybridize the high carb foods for fat. Not addictive either, so there will be special interests and corrupt government agencies kicking and scratching not to do it.
Don't mistake initial iterations as the final end product. As we say in engineering: iterate, iterate, iterate. You would be amazed at what humans can do when they put their minds to it. We will find a way. Unleash the human spirit and you'd be surprised at ways we find to farm and do other things. Songbird's stuff may seem silly at first glance, but that is not the way to look at it. The way to look at it is that it is an initial iteration. Say to yourself "I wonder if this can be improved on by ...". Look at Songbird as a pioneer (who takes the arrows).
For example, we Nevadans benefit from world class cantaloupes grown in the "desert". (I get to eat a half of one at a sitting.) Definitely not "arable land", if your were to believe the naysayers.
As far as those starving in the world, you will find it is far more a product of stifling the human spirit (Socialism) than any other reason. Were free markets are allowed, supply and demand shift resources around automatically.
By the way, "Starvation" is one of the methods "the most" brutal empire in the history of the world used to subjugate the populace (the Soviet Union). Mainly so they could not fight back. So, your war argument doesn't hold. Starving people don't go to war -- they can't.
So, how will the problem be solved? Easy. The human spirit: the free and open exchange of goods and services between consenting parties.
-T
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Todd wrote:

But the low carb crops don't produce nearly enough calories per acre, so we would need many more acres that we don't have, see my reply elsewhere.
D
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 06/11/2014 04:41 PM, David Hare-Scott wrote:

You have to do some work in hybridizing. Or grow something else that isn't addictive.
Heard a Hemp advocate on the radio. Apparently much more effective that wheat per acre and half the water. But, I could not verify anything he said.
He also said that pollen from hemp would ruin Marijuana (another plus).
As for calories. Eat an avocado! I especially love the heirloom varieties. Haas are bland and twice as expensive.
Here is a good run down for you on fat vs carbs:
On the other hand, gram for gram, fats provide more energy than carbohydrates.
http://dl.clackamas.cc.or.us/ch106-07/carbohyd1.htm
The reason for this is the amount of oxidation that takes place as these compounds are converted to carbon dioxide and water. Carbon for carbon, fats require more oxidation to become CO2 and H2O than do carbohydrates. Roughly speaking, carbohydrates already have one oxygen for every carbon atom, thus, each carbon atom needs only one more oxygen and each pair of hydrogen atoms needs one more oxygen. However, almost every carbon atom in a fat molecule needs two oxygens instead of just one additional one, and each pair of hydrogen atoms still needs one more oxygen. So, just from counting the number of oxygens needed to be added, fats require about half again as much oxygen for the same number of carbon atoms. Because of this, the oxidation of fats takes longer, but it also gives off more energy.
When comparing gram to gram, instead of carbon to carbon, the effect is exaggerated. When you weigh a carbohydrate, more oxygen is included in that weight. When you weigh a fat, you get more carbon atoms per gram and therefore, gram for gram, the fats will give even more energy (over twice as much) than will the carbohydrates. Generally, fats provide about 9 kilocalories per gram and carbohydrates provide about 4 kilocalories per gram. (Using nutritional units, that is 9 Calories/gram for fats and 4 Calories/gram for carbohydrates.)
Did you catch the part about "9 Calories/gram for fats and 4 Calories/gram for carbohydrates"? That would over double the calories you are looking for!
As far as your question as to what to replace grain with, just look in your produce isle. If you have a Mexican grocery store, there are even more options. (I have a really great one filled with the nicest people. Love them dearly. Lots of neat stuff!)
-T
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
the riddle wrapped in an enigma wrapped
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/06/2014 11:04 AM, Todd wrote:

Sure - easy peasy.
Or grow something else

Can you be more specific. Which fats do you say should be grown?

And how do you propose that anyone grows avacodoes in cereal producing country?
I especially love the heirloom

And where is the fat coming form? Specifically.

Jesus wept! Why on earth would you think David might have a Mexican grocery store near him? What do you say can replace grain? Be specific and if you don't know then say so because platitudes don't cut it.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 06/11/2014 09:48 PM, Fran Farmer wrote:

Any kind that doesn't come from a test tube.

Grow cows. I love to eat cows too. What a silly argument.

Anywhere natural. Cows, avocados, coconuts, etc.. This isn't rocket science.

Hmmmmmm.. Maybe because he is from the Peoples Republic of California. (I may have him mixed up with Higgs.)
You don't know much about California or the United States. Mexico is our neighbor. Nevada and California have little Mexican Grocery stores all over the place. The rest of the country in varying degrees too.

Do you ever go to a grocery store? Just look in the produce section. Would you like a specific list of what I eat?
By the way, I eat ZERO grains. They will first maim me then kill me. And I am just fine.
Feed the grains and the rest of the plant to cows. I will eat the cows!
-T
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/06/2014 3:43 PM, Todd wrote:

You can't grow Paleo beef in cereal country. Paleo beef is grass fed beef.
Grass does not grow in sufficient quantities in cereal growing country to feed beef. Beef that is raised in cereal growing country is all feed lot, grain fed beef. Paleos don't eat grain fed beef because it's not true to the Paleo way of eating.
And yes, it IS indeed a silly argument because you don't know what is involved or the practicalities of what you are advocating.

Fluffy answer.

You do have mixed him up with Higgs or with David Ross.

LOL.
I've seen at least a thousand US TV shows dating from as far back as the 1950s where cowboys or Indians or Mexican banditos or Texan Ranchers or outlaws or Mexican illegals or posses crossed the Rio Grande!
And of course I do know a bit about American literature. Perhaps you've heard of Cormac MaCarthy's Border trilogy? I believe that at least one movie arose from those wonderful books.
I assume you do know that these books were set in Mexico and Texas? The Mexico that sits to the South of Texas, USA?
Nevada and California have little

Gosh! I couldn't guess that from your comment that David might have a Mexican grocery nearby or from the million US TV shows I've seen........................

Don't you know that Paleos are not supposed to eat grain fed beef?
Grain fed beef is a late 20th century invention. Paleolithic man never, ever, fed beef with grain.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 06/12/2014 12:16 AM, Fran Farmer wrote:

Hi Fran,
Actually, I don't know that. I follow Mark Sisson Mr. Paleo himself and a fellow diabetic):
http://www.marksdailyapple.com/
And Steve Cooksey (another fellow diabetic):
http://www.diabetes-warrior.net/
Neither one these guys go into that. You are just suppose to approximate and not obsess on it. See Mark's comments below.
And, just feed the cows the whole plant. Feeding them straight grain gives them ulcers. And no one is suppose to eat sick animals. That is what vultures and ants (carrion eaters) are for.
You are making this way harder than it has to be. Anywhere you can raise wheat, you can also raise grass. I presume that is how you do it on your ranch.
Here is a great reference from Mark Sisson (Mr. Paleo himself) on grass fed versus grain fed beef:
http://www.marksdailyapple.com/the-differences-between-grass-fed-beef-and-grain-fed-beef/
My favorite part is:
I, ahem, want to eat delicious animals and buying delicious animals promotes their production
And: For me, the clearly superior version of beef comes from the grass-fed and –finished cows raised by ranchers committed to providing excellent stewardship of both soil and cattle. Next, cows that have been grass-fed, pastured, and grain-finished by similarly committed producers with similarly maintained soil quality.
After that? Just eat beef. Whatever you can get on a regular basis. Grab the occasional grass-fed cut when you can, see how it tastes, and figure out if it’s worth it to you.
I would be curious, if you actually read the article (you don't have to), if, from your experience as a producer of grass fed beef, if you disagree with any of his comments.
-T
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 06/12/2014 12:16 AM, Fran Farmer wrote:

Ooops. Sorry David. Honest mistake. No offense intended. (Calling someone a "Californian" around these part is considered somewhat of an insult.)
-T
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Todd wrote:

What fat, where from, how much, what density of calories per acre can it yield? Did you even look at the FAO site?

You haven't even got to the feasibility study level how can you be talking about iterations.

Irrelevant, nothing like the density of food required and needs extensive irrigation which is getting more scarce by the day.

Idealogical clap-trap doesn't feed people. If you have been driven off your land and your sons forced into the army you don't give a shit about whether the warlord is a socialist, a martian. You don't care if they are philosophers or just of another tribe that thinks your tribe is scum to be cleared so they can take over.

I didn't say starving people go to war. You have this grossly over simplified (like the rest). Famine and war go together, each is a common cause of the other.

The last translates as "I haven't a clue how to do it in practice but I have much pious hope"
I think we leave it there (as predicted) there is no progress.
D
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 06/11/2014 07:13 PM, David Hare-Scott wrote:

D,
You are just frustrated because I am not agreeing with your argument.
I think the human spirit will surprise you. Remember when the patent office was closed as there was nothing new to discover? Humanity is not a static equation. We are dynamic. Don't be so negative. There is a lot of exciting things going on in the farming community right now -- a mixture of good old fashioned knowledge handed down and science
A lot of farmers are switching to organic because they can actually make a profit. Free and open competition is how it is done.
When people stop buying grains, farmers will stop producing them. They don't make squat off them anyway. Farming/ranching is hard work and they deserve to make a living.
As I have said before, for alternatives, just go to your local produce section and look around. When I am in the meat and produce sections, the only word I can describe it as is "joy!" (One of the produce ladies just smiles and shakes her head when she sees me pick up an eggplant. The eyes give me away.)
-T
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/06/2014 12:39 PM, Todd wrote:

If he's anything like me he's probably frustrated by your failure to demonstrate that you have any capacity for critical analysis or ability to read and absorb anything that is not the latest fad in new age fluffyness.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 06/11/2014 09:31 PM, Fran Farmer wrote:

Apparently, I am frustrating you for the same reason.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Todd wrote:

Just in case you are honestly puzzled about why you annoy the shit out of most people it is because you never actually make a case for your opinions but waffle on as if you have said something meaningful. You did this with climate change and you started doing it with T2D. I called a halt in both of these because you flatly refused to produce an argument or listen to one.
Then foolishly I tried again. My fault, I thought you deserved a chance, that you might have learned something. I was wrong. Sorry everybody.
You simply don't understand what it means to produce a reasoned case supported by evidence. You continually give vague and irrelevant opinions as if they are useful facts. You studiously ignore any requests for specifics. You shift the goalposts. You cherry pick your data. You indulge in wishful thinking and call it explanation. You have all the arsenal of weapons of the true zealot who is totally immune to reasoned discourse.
So yes I am frustrated and so is Fran. No, the frustration has nothing to do with agreeing with your view of the world, I don't get frustrated with people just because they hold different views, I try to learn from them.
The problem is your UNWILLNESS TO JUSTIFY your different views, that is supremely frustrating because nobody can learn anything. But I am probably wasting my time typing as that distinction will be lost on you too. Back to gardening. Please.
D
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 06/11/2014 10:26 PM, David Hare-Scott wrote:

Oh brother David. You are just not use to dealing with others who disagree with you. No argument or reference would rise to meet your standards. You just know you are right and other who disagree with you annoy you, references, studies or no references or studies. If we don't agree with you, we are "Deniers". At times, you are not always a gentleman about it either.
Yes, now back to gardening. By the way, thank you for the help with the zukes. You are a treasure trove of information.
You are from California, aren't you? Fran wondered why I though you'd have a Mexican grocery store near by. Might have got you mixed up with Higgs.
-T
Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please. --Mark Twain
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/06/2014 4:03 PM, Todd wrote:

A more idiotic response to what David wrote is hard to imagine.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Sure, they could switch crops, but lacking a mandate why would they? People like wheat. People will buy wheat. The farmers could switch over to amaranth and probably get a good yield. And the market will say, "What's this shit?" Then go to the next farmer and buy wheat.
Farms (as opposed to agrobusiness operations) are cash strapped as it is. They can't afford to switch from high value crops to low value crops. And agrobusiness will follow the profit no matter what.
Create the demand, and then we'll talk.

Tell that to Tzar Nicholas.
--
Drew Lawson | "Look! A big distracting thing!"
| -- Crow T. Robot.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 06/12/2014 07:27 AM, Drew Lawson wrote:

Hi Drew,
Excellent point. You are entirely correct.
I say let the market dictate what we buy. We vote with our dollar for who we want to succeed.
As more and more of us get Diabetes, the demand will shift. Your odds are now one out of six you will get diabetes -- perhaps one out of three in the near future.
Also, the diet industry has discovered that carbs are what makes you fat. (You piss and blow out excess keytones [fat]. They are use or lose.)
So, the market will eventually do its magic. There will be a lot of kicking and screaming though.
"Healthy carbs", my ass. You should see the crap those scoundrel's at the American Diabetes Association wants you to eat -- you'd be diabetic forever!
Carbs are so addictive that I know of one diabetic man who killed himself rather than stop eating them. He was eventually crippled to the point were his wife had to give him his insulin injections.
I know of another man who has lost both his legs, both his kidneys (he is on the transplant list), has had a major heart attack, is on oxygen, and who know what else. He won't stop eating carbs.
Amaranth is still a grain by the way. Feed all the the grain producing plants (the whole plant) to cows. I will eat the cows.
I vote for good tasting produce and meat.
As long as freedom is allowed to prevail, the market will provide what we demand. I see both being around for a very long time. If you are in the five out of six that won't get diabetes, then by all means, have fun.
-T
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

He seems to believe that some recent (alleged) trend in growing grapes is going to revolutionize crop yields.
I assume that he is ignorant of the factors that brought the increases since WW2: industrial farming, ammonium nitrate and monocrop megafarms (mostly crowing the "carbs" he rails against).
I'm not a great fan of the current state of food production, but I recognize that it is a current necesity. Most current starvation is caused by economic/political factors. Reverting the methods of production would bring starvation caused by actual lack of food.
--
Drew Lawson While they all shake hands
and draw their lines in the sand
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 13/06/2014 12:48 AM, Drew Lawson wrote:

I too am not a fan of agribusiness as it supplies the big supermarkets and I don't think that many gardeners who grow vegetables for their own consumption would be.
I note your mention of WWII - I keep wondering why it is that there would be any need for anyone to 'go Paleo' given the history of food production and when populations in the first world were doing well due to access to good food but still had not seen the leap in numbers of those afflicted with the modern lifestyle diseases that are so abundant these days.
I've been debating whith myself whether that would date to between the wars of earlier. I suspect the timing would vary a bit according to which nation was under discussion because I know that WWII and it's rationing lead to better health amongst the general population. There's some interesting stuff on that around the web - or was last time I looked..
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.